Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM


Top Flashcards (Certified)
All Flashcards

MC 401 > MC 401 Exam 2 > Flashcards

MC 401 Exam 2 Flashcards

1
Q

Actual Malice Standard

A

Must prove knowledge or falsity or reckless disregard for the truth

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Knowledge of Falsity

A
  • One who published the statement knew that it wasn’t completely true
  • The person changed the information to do harm
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Reckless Disregard for the Truth

A

Publisher was aware the information is most likely false, serious doubts about publication, but one who published avoided the truth

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Factors for “Reckless Disregard for the Truth”

A
  • Timeliness: was the news urgent or could the defendant have fact checked?
  • Source Credibility: Should the reported have trusted the sources used or trusted the reporter?
  • Story Probability: Was the story believable or probable or was it so unlikely that most people would’ve had to fact check?
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Public Officials

A
  • Government employee with substantial government responsibility
  • Anyone appointed to gov jobs in a libel action depending on situation
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Public Officials (Example)

A
  • President Trump
  • Mayor Walt Maddox (Tuscaloosa)
  • School superintendents who is falsely accused of stealing money
    – only considered PO in libel suit bc she has control; over school district
  • City manager who has control over public affairs
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

NY Times v. Sullivan (1964)

A
  • Case that determined public officials must prove actual malice

LB Sullivan sued NY Times for publishing an ad that contained allegations of police wrongdoing
- LB said ad libeled him and he won
- This case had factual error, not actual malice

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Can a public official win a libel action based solely on “test of truth”?

A

No

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Public Figures

A

Have a wide spread of notoriety fame

  • Business/corporations can also sue for libel & be classified as this based on status/influence
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Voluntary Limited Purpose Public Figures

A

Involves themselves in public controversy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Voluntary Limited Purpose Public Figures (Example)

A

Richard Jewell
- Tried to sue media that made him look responsible for bombing
–He is not public figure
- Lost the suit bc he could not prove his innocence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Cases that determined public figures must prove actual malice:

A
  • Curtis Publishing Co v. Butts (1967)
  • Gertz v. Robert Welch Inc (1974)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Curtis Publishing Co v. Butts (1967)

A
  • Bear Bryant & Georgia coach Wally Butts conspired to fix the outcome of the 1962 in Bama’s favor
  • Wally sued Curtis Publishing for libel
  • Wally wins bc he is a well known public figure
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

News Organizations

A

Not protected against libel claims made by public figures if they are false

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Gertz v. Robert Welch Inc (1974)

A
  • American Opinion Magazine printed false statements about Elmer Gertz, who was representing a family of a boy killed by police officer
  • Gertz was not penalized bc he was doing his job
    – Argues he was private person bc he did not approach to away opinion of press
  • Gertz was not supposed to prove actual malice as private person
    – Not public official/figure, so he has more protection from libel in the public eye
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Private Persons

A

DO NOT have to prove actual malice - only negligence

17
Q

Public Officials/Figures

A

MUST prove actual malice when suing under the Tort of Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress

18
Q

Tort of Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress

A

Tort related to actual malice where the plaintiff can sue if…
1. defendant’s conduct was intentional/reckless
2. defendant’s conduct was extreme/outrageous
3. defendant caused plaintiff emotional distress
4. emotional distress was severe

  • often when plaintiff is not successful in original libel suit
19
Q

Hustler Magazine v. Falwell (1988)

A
  • Hustler Magazine published ‘advertising parodies’ with public figures fake Campari ads discussing their first sexual encounter
  • Falwell sued for ITED as was awarded money in damages
  • Ruling was then reversed when Hustler appealed
    – Falwell lost: court argued not libel bc no one actually believe this satire
    – Hustler won the suit
    – Falwell did not prove actual malice against himself
20
Q

How could have Falwell won against Hustler?

A
  • Prove that parody was factual, not opinion
  • It was false statement of fact
  • Proof of actual malice
21
Q

The Ollmann Test

A

Is a statement an assertion fact or opinion?

22
Q

Defamation

23
Q

Libel

24
Q

SLAPP Suits

25
Q

What must plaintiff prove to win libel suit?

26
Q

What must defense say when sued for libel?

27
Q

Legal Defenses

28
Q
  1. Summary of Judgement
29
Q
  1. Statute of Limitations
30
Q
  1. Republications
31
Q
  1. Consent
32
Q
  1. Jurisdiction
33
Q
  1. Libel proof plaintiff/public person
34
Q
  1. Truth
35
Q
  1. Privilege Communication
36
Q
  1. Opinion/fair comments
37
Q
  1. Extremely exaggerated/rhetorical hyperbole

MC 401 (1 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2025 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions